he_who_is_nobody wrote:Even taking that paper at face value, it concludes that blacks and Hispanics are more likely to experience force than others. That is still a problem. I also feel our resident troll does not understand what the Black Lives Matter movement is about, especially if they conclude that since white people die more from police offices, that makes everything okay.

Seems to me the BLM seeks to manipulate people with a false narrative. That's pretty shameful. People these days seems to think they can get away with anything as long as it is done under the banner of "Respect" or "Dignity". "We support Women!" or some other bullshit.

“..the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.” Tolstoy

thenexttodie wrote:Seems to me the BLM seeks to manipulate people with a false narrative. That's pretty shameful. People these days seems to think they can get away with anything as long as it is done under the banner of "Respect" or "Dignity". "We support Women!" or some other bullshit.

A honest question from someone who lives far away from the US and BLM; what false narrative?

Also if someone who knows this thing better could answer the following. As I've understand it the BLM started as a rallying call, a hashtag in the internet and as such it's more like a collection of people and local groups who roughly believe in the same ideas (mainly about the use of police force against coloured minorities) and have more or less organically formed structure (with independent local chapters), than an movement that has any real central hierarchy or leadership. So when we are talking about BLM are we actually talking about one group or another that labels themselves as BLM and their opinions?

Visaki wrote:Also if someone who knows this thing better could answer the following. As I've understand it the BLM started as a rallying call, a hashtag in the internet and as such it's more like a collection of people and local groups who roughly believe in the same ideas (mainly about the use of police force against coloured minorities) and have more or less organically formed structure (with independent local chapters), than an movement that has any real central hierarchy or leadership. So when we are talking about BLM are we actually talking about one group or another that labels themselves as BLM and their opinions?

That is actually a wonderful question. As someone that has actually gone to my local chapter, it is far more of a tight-nit group of people across the country. They would rather have local leaders than a centralised leadership. They feel this helps because every community is different, thus the local leaders are able to organize things specific to their community. There is also their Guiding Principles, which guide the groups. Thus, no centeral leadership, but principles that all chapters should abide by.

he_who_is_nobody wrote: That is actually a wonderful question. As someone that has actually gone to my local chapter, it is far more of a tight-nit group of people across the country. They would rather have local leaders than a centralised leadership. They feel this helps because every community is different, thus the local leaders are able to organize things specific to their community. There is also their Guiding Principles, which guide the groups. Thus, no centeral leadership, but principles that all chapters should abide by.

"Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise."- Hwin, what evidence do they have to support this bold claim?

“..the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.” Tolstoy

I mean seriously, that's the best they can do? The police jumped on Eric Gardner and choked him to death in New York for no reason. It breaks my heart to watch the video. That can happen to anybody in the US.

“..the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.” Tolstoy

he_who_is_nobody wrote:That is actually a wonderful question. As someone that has actually gone to my local chapter, it is far more of a tight-nit group of people across the country. They would rather have local leaders than a centralised leadership. They feel this helps because every community is different, thus the local leaders are able to organize things specific to their community. There is also their Guiding Principles, which guide the groups. Thus, no centeral leadership, but principles that all chapters should abide by.

So if there is no central leadership how did those principles come into being? Did some guy just register the http://www.blacklivesmatter.com webpage and wrote to there the principles that he (or she) thought the BLM should repricent? And what happens if someone, or some group, that indentifies as BLM does not agree with those principles (or the spesifics of them)? Does someone take their BLM badge away?

he_who_is_nobody wrote:That is actually a wonderful question. As someone that has actually gone to my local chapter, it is far more of a tight-nit group of people across the country. They would rather have local leaders than a centralised leadership. They feel this helps because every community is different, thus the local leaders are able to organize things specific to their community. There is also their Guiding Principles, which guide the groups. Thus, no centeral leadership, but principles that all chapters should abide by.

So if there is no central leadership how did those principles come into being? Did some guy just register the http://www.blacklivesmatter.com webpage and wrote to there the principles that he (or she) thought the BLM should repricent? And what happens if someone, or some group, that indentifies as BLM does not agree with those principles (or the spesifics of them)? Does someone take their BLM badge away?

If I am not mistaken, those were the Principles that were created by the three founders of the movement, however, I am sure there have been some modification since they were first made.

There are no Black Live Matter badges, anyone can go to the protests and carry a sign (even people who would disagree with their Principles). No one is forcing anyone to pledge themselves to the Principles. Think of Black Lives Matter as a political party. Does one have to agree with every plank of a party to identify as that party? Does the political party have the authority to throw people out of it if they do not agree to all their planks? Black Lives Matter is not a religion, thus people with different opinions are able to say their say under its banner, even if their say does not line up directly with their Principles.

Oh, I thought BLM organically formed around the hashtag as people around the country stared using it to show support and started to use it in demonstrations as a rallying call, didn't know that there are actually official founders. That's probably the root of my misconception with this all.

Visaki wrote:Oh, I thought BLM organically formed around the hashtag as people around the country stared using it to show support and started to use it in demonstrations as a rallying call, didn't know that there are actually official founders. That's probably the root of my misconception with this all.

It was formed around the idea that black people are not capable enough to be held accountable for their own actions. This is the common denominator of all BLM supporters.

“..the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.” Tolstoy

Visaki wrote:Oh, I thought BLM organically formed around the hashtag as people around the country stared using it to show support and started to use it in demonstrations as a rallying call, didn't know that there are actually official founders. That's probably the root of my misconception with this all.

It was formed around the idea that black people are not capable enough to be held accountable for their own actions. This is the common denominator of all BLM supporters.

Why?

Why would you say something this stupid and at the same time inflammatory?

Do you think your snarky dismissal of this movement is clever?

I mean, certainly, you can't be so stupid so as to actually mean what you just said. So why? To get a rise out of people? If you're actually serious about discussing issues on this site, I suggest you actually start to take it seriously.

We get it. You don't like the movement, but how about making real arguments instead of this crap?

thenexttodie wrote:[The BLM] was formed around the idea that black people are not capable enough to be held accountable for their own actions. This is the common denominator of all BLM supporters.

Gnug215 wrote: Why?

Why would you say something this stupid and at the same time inflammatory?

Do you think your snarky dismissal of this movement is clever?

I mean, certainly, you can't be so stupid so as to actually mean what you just said. So why? To get a rise out of people? If you're actually serious about discussing issues on this site, I suggest you actually start to take it seriously.

We get it. You don't like the movement, but how about making real arguments instead of this crap?

Do you believe black people should be held accountable for their own actions?

“..the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.” Tolstoy

thenexttodie wrote:You are a child. And it's people who think like you and agree with childish ideas who make it so easy for corrupt persons to gain access to power.

I put it to you that the one displaying childish behaviour and promulgating childish ideas is you. Such as the idea, entirely devoid of nuance or substance, that BLM is about black people not being held accountable for their actions.

Everyone should be held accountable for their actions, including those charged with the protection of society. Indeed, these people should be held to a higher standard given the responsibility they carry, and they should be properly trained to deal with situations so that they don't get out of hand unnecessarily. Like this one:

The cop is clearly doing his fruit here; he's totally lost the plot, while the woman behind the wheel, whose boyfriend has just been shot next to her, remains disproportionately calm. Do you think this officer and those responsible for his training should be held accountable for their actions?

When you're not in the oppressed minority, it's all too easy to think that any focus on the oppression is about anything more than the existence of the oppression. When you are in the oppressed minority, you're going to focus the disparity, because that's entirely the proper way to go about things, as has been demonstrated in spades time and again in the progress of recognition of basic civil rights where gains have been made in the shitty ways humans treat each other. Do you think Rosa Parks is world-famous because she sat at home moping? No, she fired the first public shot in a war that the losers still haven't realised they've lost, because of deeply-ingrained prejudices with no logical or ethical basis, and the blind adherence to the internalised doctrinal imperatives arising therefrom.

It's stupid, it's dangerous, and it should be consigned to the rubbish bin of ideas, along with all other sets of doctrinal imperatives that must be adhered to without question, such as religion.

thenexttodie wrote:You are a child. And it's people who think like you and agree with childish ideas who make it so easy for corrupt persons to gain access to power.

Whoever you're aiming your comment at, you've just insulted them - and that from a position of total inferiority. You are the one with the childish and easily corruptable ideas. You are, afterall, a religious disciple, ripe for political-picking. Why is it always the crazies that are the most persistent and prolific in pointing the finger around them, calling everyone else crazy?

Oh, also...

MOD NOTE:For insulting everyone in the most insipid and idiotic way, consider this your second and last warning before a ban.

The cop is clearly doing his fruit here; he's totally lost the plot, while the woman behind the wheel, whose boyfriend has just been shot next to her, remains disproportionately calm. Do you think this officer and those responsible for his training should be held accountable for their actions?

Hackenslash, Which part of this video is supposed to show wrongful use of lethal force by the officer?

hackenslash wrote:. When you are in the oppressed minority, you're going to focus the disparity, because that's entirely the proper way to go about things, as has been demonstrated in spades time and again.

Actually, after looking at the mans criminal record, it seems "the system" was always quite easy on him. Traffic violations are a big no-no in the US and you can go to prison for them. Plus he had 2 dismissed drug charges. How does that happen?

hackenslash wrote: ..in the progress of recognition of basic civil rights where gains have been made in the shitty ways humans treat each other. Do you think Rosa Parks is world-famous because she sat at home moping? No, she fired the first public shot in a war that the losers still haven't realised they've lost, because of deeply-ingrained prejudices with no logical or ethical basis, and the blind adherence to the internalised doctrinal imperatives arising therefrom.

Rosa Parks was right to refuse being mistreated because she was black. Because of her and many other people in the US who supported the Civil RIghts Movement, the United States is probably the only country in the world where people can live a life void of the racism which is apparent in European, South American, Middle East and Eastern countries.

Now believe it or not, white people in the US are shot all the fucking time by the police too! ALL THE TIME! Even when we are unarmed!

“..the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.” Tolstoy

thenexttodie wrote:Hackenslash, Which part of this video is supposed to show wrongful use of lethal force by the officer?

thenexttodie, which part of my post is supposed to suggest that that's what I was showing with the video?

hackenslash wrote:Actually, after looking at the mans criminal record, it seems "the system" was always quite easy on him. Traffic violations are a big no-no in the US and you can go to prison for them. Plus he had 2 dismissed drug charges. How does that happen?

Actually, after looking in my mum's kitchen, it seems she has a washing machine. Washing machines are highly recommended in the UK, and you can get them from a white goods store. Plus she has a toaster.

How is this remotely relevant to the point being made?

hackenslash wrote:Rosa Parks was right to refuse being mistreated because she was black. Because of her and many other people in the US who supported the Civil RIghts Movement, the United States is probably the only country in the world where people can live a life void of the racism which is apparent in European, South American, Middle East and Eastern countries.

Now believe it or not, white people in the US are shot all the fucking time by the police too! ALL THE TIME! Even when we are unarmed!